Amazon Kindle Fire - retail price $199, unit production cost $202 and they ship it to you for free.

Yeah, although I believe one of the unique elements of that that camera manufacturers can't take advantage of is putting ads on your screen. But, lenses are very much like apps, so otherwise it makes sense.

I find it interesting that the D600 released at basically the same price point as the 5dII is at now, retail wise. Makes me wonder if they can really go much lower in terms of retail price than the $2000 mark.

Yes, the 7D, 60D, T2i/550D, and T3i/600D use the same sensor. The 650D adds on-sensor phase detect AF. You're saying the 650D has better IQ than the 550D/600D/7D...and if you're making that claim, you need to back it up, because from the testing that I've seen, there's no meaningful difference in IQ.

That's the exact word... no meaningful difference. Sorry I've made a mistake of comparing 7D to an almost 50% cheaper new rebel.

No, you said, "Even 650D is better." Not 'no meaningful difference'...better. Now that you can't back your claim up with evidence, there's no difference.

As for the 650D being half the cost of the 7D, with no better IQ, so what? No one is claiming the 7D delivers better IQ, that's not what it's about. The 1DsIII launched at over three times the cost of the 5DII, with no meaningful IQ difference. The 7D offers a whole host of improvements over the 650D in areas that are critically important to some people, and irrelevant to others. If you're one of those who derives no benefit from the better features of the 7D, stick with your 500D and be happy.

Canon doesn't just set their prices based on the (supposed) superiority of a competitor's product. They set prices based on their own production costs.

I'm quite sure you're wrong here - their production costs have nothing to do with it, I doubt they can even figure them out considering the r&d involved that has to be returned, too. The price is simply as high as they can get away with it w/o loosing too much market share, and whey the early adopters got the products they'll lower the price according to demand (that might be official or vendor rebates, too).

+1 exactly what I would have said. If costs were based on production only then Canon would:

1) Either have to re-tool their lines2) Go out of Business

if competitor production costs are 20-30% less...

At the end of the day, Canon will Milk their customers because they have good glass... people are bought into a system. The 5d3 was overpriced for this reason, and they got away with it... but many people are peed off that a similar costing body, costs 500-700 less. Had the 5d3 have similar DR and low ISO noise performance as the D800, it would have been a different story. Sensor cost for FF is higher than APS-C yes, but it is no where near what people are led to believe.... it is no where near the 60% of total cost that some people claim...

The 5d2 also has an FF sensor and sells in the $1700 refurb market... don't tell me 60% of the cost of the 5d3 is the 7 year old technology sensor used in the 5d2.

Nikon can buy sensors form Sony (who make a profit) stick them in their bodies and sell them for less than Canon, if anything, Nikon bodies should cost more... and we have fanboys telling us how high productions costs are... please.

Nikon has done well by properly pricing their bodies... helps us Canon guys in the long run.

Now Nikon... please make a Body that can take EF lens's and you will really do us a favor by making Canon sending their engineers to work on better sensor tech and not waste time on making new $$$ Cine bodies everytime we look around.

PS: This is my last post as a 1D Mark IV... I will try and be nicer in my first post as a 1D X

.I've read some whoppers on this forum, but this is worthy of a "Looniest Ever" award nomination. This is worthy of the advanced economic thinking that created the worldwide banking/financial crisis.

Apparently Henry Ford was right when he said, "Everything is possible." Not "anything," but "everything."

Congratulations on taking us to a new realm.

It must be working. Last Sunday I was walking about, taking pictures as I am wont to do. I came across two little girls on the side of the road with a lemonade stand. They also had available water and candy and a few other sundries; they had learned to diversify. They told me they were trying to "earn enough money to buy french fries." True story.

So, their "manufacturing costs" meant nothing once they had enough cash on hand to head for the Burger King.

You'll have to excuse me now as I'm headed to the bank. I want to apply for a loan so I can start a business making cameras. I want to set up the most best and most expensive manufacturing facility I can imagine -- put a lot of people to work along the way, and then sell the cameras for less than they cost to produce. A sure winning plan, and the bank will surely want to be my partner.

yeah this camera will drop down price for xmas! maybe a 200 dollars drop. hope the uk follows as the price here is just fekin ridiculous!! and canon will do the same if they release it (6D) before december.

Looking at the specs and starting price (which could drop in a few months) it could be popular with Videographers

Nah, the DSLR days for video are wrapping up. The GH3 will probably be the last relevant video DSLR. People are moving up to cameras that are designed for cinema use...Sony just put out a full frame VG900 with an E mount that you can use the Metabones adapter to host your EF glass on, and Canon's C100 with the addition of an external recorder is going to get you terrific output with no excessive rigging needs. The Nikons are still stuck in the line-skipping days so having clean HDMI out doesn't help terribly much, and the low light performance isn't so great either for video.

Commenting further above, the 650D sensor actually tests out a little worse than the 600D/60D/7D/550D. Canon would do better working off the 1DX sensor I think rather than the 5D3 sensor...the 1DX has better video resolution due to better in-camera processing. But they will probably build off the 5D3 sensor as it may be cheaper for them to make.

Lots of interesting comments and points of view. I love competition, we consumers win. Now hopefully Canon will offer a successful answer to Nikon.

Personally I'm not concerned about the lowest price or even a "low" price. Just give us a good solid FF body option with the essential specs that is priced appropriately. Must have AFMA, 7D/5D form factor/button layout, and good build (and of course it must have the essentials).

I don't like this notion "entry level FF" that is being tossed around on CR. Entry cameras are lower end Rebels. There is plenty of room for another xD FF body IMO but with reduced features. Lots of folks who don't want to (or can't) fork out $3,500 for the 5D3. And I'm sure lots of folks who would love a second FF body but with less bells and whistles than the 5D3.

Yes, the 7D, 60D, T2i/550D, and T3i/600D use the same sensor. The 650D adds on-sensor phase detect AF. You're saying the 650D has better IQ than the 550D/600D/7D...and if you're making that claim, you need to back it up, because from the testing that I've seen, there's no meaningful difference in IQ.

That's the exact word... no meaningful difference. Sorry I've made a mistake of comparing 7D to an almost 50% cheaper new rebel.

No, you said, "Even 650D is better." Not 'no meaningful difference'...better. Now that you can't back your claim up with evidence, there's no difference.

As for the 650D being half the cost of the 7D, with no better IQ, so what? No one is claiming the 7D delivers better IQ, that's not what it's about. The 1DsIII launched at over three times the cost of the 5DII, with no meaningful IQ difference. The 7D offers a whole host of improvements over the 650D in areas that are critically important to some people, and irrelevant to others. If you're one of those who derives no benefit from the better features of the 7D, stick with your 500D and be happy.

Sorry it took sometime because 650D apparently is a little bit new. I know the difference isn't that much, but there it is.

Yup. You're right. I'm not going the 7D way. I'm leaning more on landscape photography and portraiture so DR is more important to me. I'm happy with my 500D but I'm thinking of going for an FF instead of a crop. What I'm trying to say is that it used to be that 7D speed, AF and weather seal are enough to justify its cost for me but now with the newer 650D it almost isn't the case anymore or shall we say it's already due for replacement. Sure for sports or bird photographers like you, 7D might still be a better alternative or 2nd body but not for me or everyone else involved in other types of photography. To add, money is also an object for somebody like me but not to professionals like you so my opinion on this matter. Anyway, thanks for the advise on being happy with my 500D. It makes sense.

This move by Nikon is not about a body, but about the whole ecosystem. When you buy a camera, being a P&S, a mirrorless, a DSLR, etc, what the company is getting is the potential to upsell you with accessories, lenses, better bodies, and in Canon's case, mice and calculators.

The ultimate business goal for Canon (or Nikon) is for you to buy all of that from them. Thus they offer a coherent progression: from P&S to Rebels to higher end crops to FF. There are two weak links in the chain. The first is the transition from P&S to a low end DSLR as you are not really invested on a system yet. However, even at that level there are elements to steer your purchase to the ecosystem: similar-looking user interfaces, similar design language, brand recognition, etc. The second weak point is the transition from crop to FF. Here you are already in the ecosystem, but for most the transition probably involves buying some new -expensive lenses-.

In the past few years, mirrorless punched a hole in the first transition. Canon (and Nikon) now had to deal with a third option for people ready to move up form a P&S. The main effect of the mirrorless was not really as much as lost revenue due to lesser sales of Rebels, but lost revenue due to the people they failed to get into the ecosystem. Every person who does not buy a Rebel, will not buy flashes, expensive lenses, and probably won't buy your calculators either. Nikon respoded with the Nikon 1 system. Canon responded recently as well, but with an option that seems overpriced at the moment give what brings to the table. In any case, both Canon and Nikon are acting to plug that hole.

Now back to the D600. This camera is aimed squarely at the second transition. This is Nikon telling folks stuck in the Rebel/60D/7D world because of the high cost of entry into Canon FF, "hey fellows, you want s significant increase in IQ for a cost that is reasonable to you (otherwise you would already gotten a 5DIII)?... here have the D600". This is FF for people who is already invested in photography (enough to spend two grand on a body) but for which 3 grand for an MKIII is beyond of what they want to spend. This people almost by definition is bound to buy accessories, lenses, and even perhaps, at some point move up in the ecosystem and get more expensive bodies. Nikon is taking the market that Canon built via very good, inexpensive rebels, and moving them to their ecosystem. Genius.

In my mind there is also a psychological component to the move: Canon has been hitting us with substantial price increases with every new product. Nikon am sure is playing that card: "look, we care about amateurs that were priced out of the upgrade path by Canon. Hence, you should assume we are nicer fellows to deal with". Some may even think Nikon lenses will be cheaper (not the case AFAIK).

My point with this long rant is that the D600 is a game changer, not from a features standpoint but from a business angle. It should not to be evaluated against the 5DIII (or even the 5DII, which for most people updating from more "modern" crops feels stale and outdated... after all Canon trained us to expect a new Rebel every year and a new XXD every two or so. Two grand for a 5y/o piece of electronics that has already been replaced... yeah right). The D600 should be evaluated against the 7D for those upgrading from Rebels or 60D and has no real competition for those upgrading from a 7D. Granted, the 7D is a spectacular camera beyond IQ (amazing AF, great speed, etc.). But for many, those features are nice to have but are secondary to a better IQ. If the D600 delivers on what it promises, Canon will have to respond the same way it responded to the mirrorless sucking -a perhaps significant- portion of the stream of early-stage upgraders because otherwise they will suffer a significant bleeding at the FF transition.

I, personally, will give Canon about a year to release a budget FF because am invested in the system. I don't need an FF that can track a fly flying towards me, a frame rate fast enough to capture a balloon exploding, or weather sealing tight enough I can take the camera diving. I do want better AF than a Rebel/60D (the 7D AF would do), AFMA, 5 FPS would be plenty, and a significant improvement in IQ over what any of those cameras can deliver. Better noise control at higher ISO levels (at least clean images @ 3200... please?) would be greatly appreciated. I will gladly pay two grand for such camera and promise to eventually buy a 24-70 MKII and whatever will replace the 430EXII. If you come up with a ring-based 100-400 (under 2K of course) I may get that as well. If you release this soon I promise I will even buy the calculator.

Thanks for the link. Clicking on the RAW Comparison subtab, scrolling down, Imaging Resource states, "As you can see, the Canon T4i performs very similar to the T3i, though detail in the red leaf cloth isn't quite as good (something we also saw in camera JPEGs)." So, you were correct in that there is a slight difference...except the T4i/650D actually seems to be a little worse, not better, compared to the T3i (7D sensor).

What I'm trying to say is that it used to be that 7D speed, AF and weather seal are enough to justify its cost for me but now with the newer 650D it almost isn't the case anymore or shall we say it's already due for replacement. Sure for sports or bird photographers like you, 7D might still be a better alternative or 2nd body but not for me or everyone else involved in other types of photography. To add, money is also an object for somebody like me but not to professionals like you so my opinion on this matter. Anyway, thanks for the advise on being happy with my 500D. It makes sense.

Well, the 7D is over three years old now. But still, the IQ is equivalent to the 650D, the AF is substantially better, and the build is way better.

One key thing for me, and a big part of the reason I upgraded from a T1i/500D to a 7D in the first place, is AF Microadjustment. I shoot with fast primes, and the lack of AFMA can be a real problem in that case. You either need to get lucky, be willing to buy and return multiple copies of a lens, or be willing to send lens(es) and body into Canon for adjustment. Personally, I'll never buy a camera that lacks AFMA. Now, I'm not going to buy one, but the D600 does have AFMA. If Canon omit that from an entry-level FF body (as the omitted it from the 60D, despite having it in the 50D), that will be a serious error, IMO.

Does a cameras age really matter? Sure the 7d is 3-4 years old but I got cameras that are 10-20 times older that still take a good picture. But for me a canon 7d and a canon 5d2 is an awesome combo and I'm gonna trade up to those! And now theres a new iPhone to be preordered tomorrow!!!